Can someone please explain to me how they can "beam" two people from a planet to a starship at warp light years away... yet they cannot beam a person off a shuttle craft from orbit only a few hundred miles away?
Continuity between movies & Transporter Tech
- Thread starter Omega-Trekker
- Start date
This subforum is for questions about the board's operation, not questions in general. I'm sure a helpful mod will move this to Trek Tech shortly.
Also, some context would be helpful. I recognize your first example, but I'm not sure what you're referencing in the second one.
Also, some context would be helpful. I recognize your first example, but I'm not sure what you're referencing in the second one.
Interference's from the planet's ______________________.
I'm guessing that's transwarp beaming from the 2009 movie? That was Scotty's formula from the future, introduced into the past of the Kelvin timeline. It's not how transporters work, although it's massively inconsistent.
Sadly, Picard, Discovery and SFA have ignored it. Maybe it was erased in the temporal wars or some shit
If we took what transporters are shown to do seriously...
I just came here to post THIS as a new thread after watching the Captain in the new SFA ask Jet if they were in transporter range of ANYWHERE to send the 2 cadets that were hiding in the turbolift...
How far IS transporter range in the (allegedly) "Prime Timeline" 32nd century?
I want to know the range of Transporters in the 32nd century, since Scotty discovered transwarp beaming in the 23rd in a parallel timeline, the Prime should have it by now.
Even if Prime Scotty never had the idea - SOMEBODY should have!
Plus, a Ferengi used a long distance subspace transporter in the 24th century in a TNG episode (I assume this is very similar to transwarp beaming.)
And the "Prime" timeline is AWARE of the Kelvin Timeline.
In fact...they shouldn't have NEEDED starships after The Burn!!
They should be BEAMING from Federation world to Federation world.
Starships should be for protecting territory and for exploration outside of it...to scout of new safe worlds to beam too.
Of course, you could "retcon" transwarp beaming...maybe Khan in "Into Darkness" *really* used a SERIES of relays scattered throughout Federation and Klingon space, to get to Kronos!?
Also...maybe transwarp and subspace beaming REQUIRE...DILITHIUM...maybe even a LOT of dilithium...so after The Burn it wasn't feasible to support the Federation through transwarp or subspace transporting.
How far IS transporter range in the (allegedly) "Prime Timeline" 32nd century?
I want to know the range of Transporters in the 32nd century, since Scotty discovered transwarp beaming in the 23rd in a parallel timeline, the Prime should have it by now.
Even if Prime Scotty never had the idea - SOMEBODY should have!
Plus, a Ferengi used a long distance subspace transporter in the 24th century in a TNG episode (I assume this is very similar to transwarp beaming.)
And the "Prime" timeline is AWARE of the Kelvin Timeline.
In fact...they shouldn't have NEEDED starships after The Burn!!
They should be BEAMING from Federation world to Federation world.
Starships should be for protecting territory and for exploration outside of it...to scout of new safe worlds to beam too.
Of course, you could "retcon" transwarp beaming...maybe Khan in "Into Darkness" *really* used a SERIES of relays scattered throughout Federation and Klingon space, to get to Kronos!?
Also...maybe transwarp and subspace beaming REQUIRE...DILITHIUM...maybe even a LOT of dilithium...so after The Burn it wasn't feasible to support the Federation through transwarp or subspace transporting.
Sadly, Picard, Discovery and SFA have ignored it. Maybe it was erased in the temporal wars or some shit
People keep forgetting that TNG: "Bloodlines" established that 24th-century Starfleet was already fully aware of interstellar beaming technology (which they obviously should have been given that it was previously encountered in "The Gamesters of Triskelion," "Assignment: Earth," and "That Which Survives" a century earlier), but did not use it because its power demands and imprecision made it dangerous and impractical to use. This is consistent with how it was depicted in the 2009 movie, where Scotty nearly drowned because the targeting was imprecise.
Really, that should be obvious -- any margin of error in the destination coordinates would be amplified over greater distance, so that a percentile error that translates to one millimeter when you're beaming 20,000 kilometers would amplify to one kilometer when you're beaming 20 billion kilometers, so over interstellar distances you'd have a good chance of missing the target planet entirely. So yeah, they know how to do interstellar beaming; they also know that they shouldn't do it, because they're not crazy. (Not to mention that interstellar beaming would be useless for exploration, since you'd arrive at an unknown destination with no support structure or backup if you got into trouble. It would only make sense for travel to known destinations.)
People, including the writers of Star Trek Into Darkness, also misunderstand that "transwarp beaming" as explained in the '09 movie did not refer to interstellar beaming per se, but to beaming onto a ship at warp from a stationary starting point (hence "transwarp" in the sense of across the warp bubble, rather than "beyond warp" as in transwarp drive). The difficulty was with hitting a fast-moving target (indeed, a target outside the normal spacetime continuum), and that was where the technological innovation lay.
Similar threads
